It was reported over the weekend that the owner of a gun store in Arizona is telling Pres. Obamas supporters he doesnt want their business.

Cope Reynolds, the owner of Southwest Shooting Authority, a gun store located in Pinetop, Arizona, took out a full page ad in a local newspaper that read: If you voted for Barack Obama your business is not welcome.

The New York Daily News reports that Mr. Reynolds also posted a sign on the stores front door:

If you voted for Obama, please turn around and leave! You have proven you are not responsible enough to own a firearm.

It is not known how Reynolds will identify Obama supporters and it doesnt seem likely that one would admit to having voted to reelect the president if they wish to purchase a gun at his store.

doesnt seem likely that one would admit to having voted to reelect the president if they wish to purchase a gun

Hard to imagine someone who DID vote for Barry being interested in legitimately buying a weapon. I doubt they could pass the background check. I bet all of Holder's people buy their guns on the street corners and in the back alleys...

Well I was messing with you, giving you a hard time for advising a business owner to be a wimp and just shut up, go along, to get along. That is the net result of your advice by the way.

BUT - I don’t think this stupid sign, that does not even appear to be official government signage, changes the Constitution. There are pockets in this country where businesses have lost the ablity to refuse service, but such is not the law of the land. Businesses, by and large, do reserve the right to refuse service. If we capitulate on that, we will certainly lose it totally one day however.

Anyone can be sued for anything at any time. If you live in fear of that, you are a sheep.

“Anyone can be sued for anything at any time. If you live in fear of that, you are a sheep”

And if you shove your hand into a grinder you are a fool.

I don’t know what the store owner’s profits are, or what the particular burdens are to sell guns, and whether that ability is a ‘right’ or a ‘privilege’, but law suits are expensive things, and administrative law is a tyrannical thing, and this guy is courting the loss of his business from a couple of angles.

As for ‘wimp’, ‘fear’ and so on, the Celts thought that body armor was an indicator of cowardice. Romans did not. The results which followed demonstrated some doctrinal deficiencies on the part of the Gauls. I am with Patton. The point of the exercise is to make the other son of a bitch die for his country, not throw oneself on a theatrical sword.

According to the Civil Rights Center of the Dept of Labor, your sign is only applicable to the following: "CRC is committed to providing its customers with clear and easy-to-access information on how to comply with federal equal opportunity and nondiscrimination laws and regulations that (1) prohibit discrimination in DOL funded programs and activities, and (2) prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability by certain public entities and in DOL conducted activities."

Note it is very specific to DOL funded programs and activities as well as some disability (ADA) discrimination by public entities.

From what I can find, and unless you can provide evidence otherwise, the gun store owner is not subject to this unless he's discriminating against hiring people or otherwise discriminating against his employees.

What else would you call your attitude? Your POV is that you, and only you, have the wisdom to know if and where the gun store owner should draw the line in the sand? Your POV assumes, yes it does, assumes that the owner of the store is not capable of making that calculation on his own.

It does represent the direction of federal government actions in many areas though, usually under the interstate commerce clause. This is not merely the sale of hotel accommodations or hamburgers either. Some ACLU type will suddenly remember the 2nd Amendment right and plead that these poor customers were denied access to that right.

We’ll see what happens. My whole comment was that I hoped the owner does not get sued for being candid in what is an emerging totalitarian state.

Thankfully, so far, the limits to public accommodation with respect to products that have moved in interstate commerce (Civil Rights Act 1964 Sec. 201, 42 USC 2000a(a)) is that who you voted for or your political party affiliation is not a protected class.

As for the ACLU, that would be quite possibly the first time the ACLU defended the 2nd Amendment, though I imagine that it would fail as the plaintiff would have to show that they were denied their right to “keep and bear arms”. Sufficient remedy would be to go to another seller.

Don’t over estimate my interest in your entire attitude towards citizens and government - I could care less - but simply in the world of forums, where each conversation is unto itself, I accurately defined your POV within the context of this conversation.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.